Evesham Axis FX 60 Fireball

Evesham combine AMD's latest FX-60 processor with a glorious 21in TFT

Speculation has been rife as to when AMD would release a dual-core version of its Athlon 64 FX processor, and now we finally have one: the Athlon 64 FX-60.

Evesham and Mesh are never slow on the uptake when it comes to new technology, and both managed to get us FX-60 review systems, namely the Evesham Axis FX 60 Fireball and Mesh Xtreme FX60.

You can see a picture of the Mesh Xtreme FX60 (referenced throughout this review) and its scores here.

Although each obviously houses the new FX-60 processor, there are some important differences. That said, both are priced the same at £2,199 including VAT.
Despite initial rumours that the FX-60 would house two of the 2.8GHz cores seen in the FX-57, AMD has decided to drop the clock speed of both cores to 2.6GHz the same as the single core of the slightly older FX-55 processor.

Like the FX-57, the FX-60 is built around the current Socket 939 design and supports SSE3 (streaming SIMD extensions 3); the latter is designed to aid performance during gaming and multimedia applications, but few software titles take advantage of it at present.

The FX-60 has a total of 2MB L2 cache (each core houses 1MB of L2) and will work in conjunction with PC1600, PC2100, PC2700 and PC3200 DDR memory. As expected, there’s still no support for DDR2 memory. Reports are circulating that AMD will soon release a DDR2-compatible processor, but we have nothing firm to go on as yet.

Total effective data bandwidth for the processor sits at 14.4Gbytes/sec ­ the same as both the FX-55 and FX-57 models. The FX-60 is also made using the same 90nanometer fabrication process as on the X2 4800+ dual-core processor the previous top-dog dual-core chip from AMD. If you like big numbers, you’ll be pleased to hear the approximate transistor count sits at a mindblowing 233.2 million.

When new processors arrive on the scene, concerns are often raised about operating temperature. The FX-60 has a maximum ambient case temperature of 65ºC and, according to AMD, heatsinks recommended for use with the dual-core X2 4800+ will provide adequate cooling for the FX-60.

As for pricing, AMD tells us the FX-60 will be available at $1,031 (£587.25) for a boxed version. Before the release of the FX-60, this was AMD’s stated price for the FX-57, and we expect the introduction of the FX-60 to drive the price of older processors down a fair whack.

Before we move on to the two review systems, it’s worth mentioning how the FX-60 performs on our standard test rig. In PCmark05 it managed to clock up a score of 5,991. For reference, the X2 4800+ scored 4,832. In our Cinebench test, which runs various 3D tasks, the FX-60 hit 690 ­ 50 more than the X2 4800+.

You can see how its performance compares to other CPUs at www.reportlabs.com.

As far as looks go, the Evesham Axis FX 60 Fireball wins hands down. We’ve seen Evesham use this stylish case a few times before and it never fails to impress. It’s not just aesthetics, though ­ the display panel offers CPU temperature and fan speeds, along with more basic details such as time and date.

The most noticeable internal difference between the two is on the graphics front. Evesham has opted for a single Nvidia Geforce 7800 GTX, while Mesh has decided to do things the SLI (scalable link interface) way and use two separate Geforce 7800 GT cards in its Xtreme FX60 system.

Thanks to our benchmarks, the performance difference isn’t hard to spot. The single 7800 GTX in the Evesham is an awesomely powerful card, and the score of 7,967 in 3Dmark05 isn’t to be sniffed at, but the two 7800 GTs in the Mesh combined to produce a far more impressive score of 11,496 in the same test.

As well as supplying double the number of graphics cards, Mesh has also doubled the memory to 2GB of PC3200 Ram.

Both manufacturers have opted for extra-large monitors, which is a wise decision since these PCs are designed to run games and other applications at high resolutions.

Mesh ships the Philips 200W6CS ­ a 20in widescreen model with a native resolution of 1,680 x 1,050. Evesham goes one step further and supplies the excellent 21in NEC LCD2170NX.

Unlike the Philips, this has a standard 4:3 aspect ratio along with a native resolution of 1,600 x 1,200. It also costs about £200 more than the Philips.

Sony must be offering some decent bulk-buy deals on its optical drives; both Evesham and Mesh have gone for Sony DVD-Rom and Sony dual-layer DVD-RW drives. Using two separate discs (200GB and 300GB), Mesh supplies a fair bit more hard drive storage space than Evesham’s single 320GB drive.

Software is often an overlooked aspect of a new PC system, but a decent bundle can save you a fair bit of cash. Evesham includes Microsoft Works 8, Roxio Easy Media Creator 7 and Bullguard Internet Security, whereas Mesh limits its bundle to Works 8.5. Both come with Windows XP Home Edition as standard.

Mesh supplies the better of the two warranties: three-year on-site cover as opposed to Evesham’s two-year on-site and one-year return to base.

Although they’re not cheap, both these systems offer good value for money. Mesh decided to concentrate on boosting graphics performance, while Evesham spent more money on a bigger monitor and more feature-rich case.

If you’re looking for super-fast graphics, the Mesh’s SLI offering will no doubt appeal the 2GB Ram and two hard drives also go in its favour. But those craving an extra-large monitor will sway towards the Evesham.

Despite not being a dual-graphics card system, the powerful 7800 GTX should be more than enough for most; you can always add a second at a later stage.

Overall, we feel the Mesh system offers slightly better value for money, but not by much.

Going back to the FX-60 processor, the question has to be asked whether the average Joe really needs a dual processor.

Certainly, if you’re just running basic applications and playing the occasional game, you’d be wasting your money on one of these systems. However, for hardened gamers and those who frequently run multithreaded applications, dual-core facilitates significant performance improvements.

The FX-60 clocked up some decent benchmark scores, and is definitely an improvement on the previous AMD dual-core champion, the X2 4800+. What we would really like to see is a processor based on two 2.8GHz cores, thereby acting like two FX-57 CPUs.

We wait with bated breath to see what AMD, and indeed Intel, have in store for the future.